PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CZA vs. VO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CZA vs. VO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) and Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF (VO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CZA achieves a 5.97% return, which is significantly lower than VO's 10.05% return. Over the past 10 years, CZA has underperformed VO with an annualized return of 10.10%, while VO has yielded a comparatively higher 11.55% annualized return.


CZA

1D
-0.24%
1M
1.90%
YTD
5.97%
6M
6.65%
1Y
13.18%
3Y*
12.55%
5Y*
6.64%
10Y*
10.10%

VO

1D
-0.45%
1M
3.20%
YTD
10.05%
6M
9.73%
1Y
18.13%
3Y*
16.69%
5Y*
7.87%
10Y*
11.55%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CZA vs. VO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CZA
Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF
5.97%8.31%12.14%7.00%-5.91%27.42%0.35%32.27%-8.89%21.90%
VO
Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF
10.05%11.62%15.31%16.03%-18.73%24.70%18.10%30.98%-9.24%19.28%

Correlation

The correlation between CZA and VO is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.89

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.91

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.92

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.91

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2007

0.81

The correlation between CZA and VO shifts across timeframes, from 0.81 (all time) to 0.92 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CZA vs. VO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CZA
VO

Financial Services

23.8%
12.8%

Industrials

16.0%
17.9%

Healthcare

12.6%
7.6%

Utilities

10.6%
8.3%

Real Estate

10.5%
5.4%

Technology

10.5%
18.6%

Consumer Cyclical

6.2%
8.6%

Basic Materials

4.2%
4.2%

Consumer Defensive

2.9%
4.8%

Energy

0.8%
8.5%

Communication Services

-

3.1%

Financial Services

CZA
23.8%
VO
12.8%

Industrials

CZA
16.0%
VO
17.9%

Healthcare

CZA
12.6%
VO
7.6%

Utilities

CZA
10.6%
VO
8.3%

Real Estate

CZA
10.5%
VO
5.4%

Technology

CZA
10.5%
VO
18.6%

Consumer Cyclical

CZA
6.2%
VO
8.6%

Basic Materials

CZA
4.2%
VO
4.2%

Consumer Defensive

CZA
2.9%
VO
4.8%

Energy

CZA
0.8%
VO
8.5%

Communication Services

CZA

-

VO
3.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

CZA vs. VO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CZA
CZA Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
CZA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2929
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CZA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
CZA Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
CZA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
CZA Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank

VO
VO Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
VO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
VO Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
VO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
VO Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CZA vs. VO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) and Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF (VO). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


CZAVODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.55

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.26

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.44

2.23

-0.79

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.48

8.50

-3.01

CZA vs. VO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CZA Sharpe Ratio is 1.04, which is comparable to the VO Sharpe Ratio of 1.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CZA and VO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CZAVODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.04

1.48

-0.44

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.41

0.45

-0.04

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

0.61

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.48

0.50

-0.03

Drawdowns

CZA vs. VO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CZA drawdown since its inception was -53.20%, smaller than the maximum VO drawdown of -58.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CZA and VO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CZAVODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-53.20%

-58.87%

+5.67%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.21%

-8.17%

-1.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.92%

-19.02%

+0.10%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.92%

-27.57%

+8.65%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.18%

-39.37%

-6.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.78%

-0.45%

-0.33%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.88%

-7.86%

+0.98%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.41%

2.14%

+0.27%

Volatility

CZA vs. VO - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) and Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF (VO) have volatilities of 3.13% and 2.99%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CZAVODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.13%

2.99%

+0.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.30%

9.21%

+0.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.78%

12.34%

+0.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.14%

17.59%

-1.45%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.28%

18.95%

+0.33%

CZA vs. VO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CZA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than VO's 0.03% expense ratio.


Dividends

CZA vs. VO - Dividend Comparison

CZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, more than VO's 1.36% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CZA
Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF
1.47%1.56%1.27%1.36%1.71%0.89%1.42%1.40%1.27%1.10%1.87%1.37%
VO
Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF
1.36%1.52%1.49%1.52%1.60%1.12%1.45%1.48%1.82%1.35%1.45%1.47%

Frequently Asked Questions


CZA and VO have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CZA has higher volatility (3.13%) compared to VO (2.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CZA dropped -53.20% vs VO's -58.87%.

On 10-year performance, VO leads with 11.55% vs 10.10% for CZA. On fees, VO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, VO has been the lower-risk option at 2.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, VO has performed better with a 11.55% return vs 10.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VO is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CZA.

CZA has the higher dividend yield at 1.47%, compared with 1.36% for VO.

CZA tracks Zacks Mid-Cap Core Index, while VO tracks CRSP US Mid Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CZA and 0.03% for VO.

VO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.48 vs 1.04), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CZA and VO

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer